It is usually easy to determine when an item is physically provided to a person. For example, a merchant or manufacturer can typically determine when the person physically takes possession of the item (e.g., by monitoring when the person removes the item from a store or when the item is delivered to the person). As a result, ownership of the item is commonly transferred to the person at this time. That is, ownership of the item may be transferred when the person takes the item from a store or when the item is shipped to (or received by) the person. Moreover, the person commonly provides payment for the item at this time (e.g., the person may provide payment via a credit card account when the item is shipped to his or her home address).
A number of disadvantages arise, however, when ownership is transferred in this way. Consider, for example, an item that is consumed by a person on a regular basis. Examples of such consumable items include paper supplies and toner cartridges used by a printer, batteries, disposable contact lenses, and prescription medicines. In this case, the person may only be able (or willing) to provide payment for a limited amount of the consumable item (e.g., a one-month supply of disposable contact lenses)—even though he or she will eventually need more than limited amount.
As a result, the consumable item may need to be frequently provided to the person. For example, the person may need to frequently visit a merchant's store or the consumable item may need to be frequently delivered to the person. Such an approach may be inconvenient, time consuming, and inefficient for the person and/or a merchant. Moreover, a merchant, distributor, and/or manufacturer may need to store a significant amount of the consumable item (e.g., increasing the overhead costs and risk associated with inventory). A merchant may also find that the person has decided to make future purchases of the item from another merchant.
Other problems can also arise if a merchant only knows when an item is physically provided to a person. One such problem is that the merchant cannot accurately predict when the person will need an additional amount of the item. For example, a merchant may know that three toner cartridges were delivered to a person at the beginning of the year. The merchant will not know, however, when the person has used two of the three cartridges (e.g., and would therefore be interested in purchasing additional cartridges).
Another problem is that the quality of an item may depend on factors other than when the item was manufactured and/or delivered to a person. Consider, for example, film used by photographers. In this case, the quality of the film will depends on the date it was manufactured (e.g., and the manufacturer may therefore indicate an appropriate “sell by” or “use by” date on a package of film). The quality may also depend, however, on when a person opens a sealed package of film. There is no efficient way for a merchant or manufacturer to take this information into account (e.g., in order to notify a person that the quality of his or her film may not be acceptable).
Still another problem is that warranty information (e.g., the effective or expiration date of a warranty, a return policy, or a guarantee) is based on when an item was provided to a person. For example, an item's warranty may expire sixty days after a person receives the item—even if the person does not use the item until fifty days after the item was received.
Other problems include a limited amount of security information that is available (e.g., a merchant will not know when an unauthorized person accesses an item en route to a purchaser) and a limited amount of information that is available to a person who sends an item to a friend (e.g., a sender may know that FEDERAL EXPRESS® left a package for the friend on Monday but will not know when the friend actually opens the package). A similar problem arises with respect to agreements that become effective when a person opens a package (e.g., a software “shrink-wrap” license agreement). In this case, a manufacturer may not know when the person has accepted the agreement.
Moreover, known methods of determining information other than the time when an item is physically provided to a person can be inefficient and expensive. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,971,594 entitled “Medication Dispensing System” discloses a system that lets a central monitoring facility determine if a person has not received medication within a prescribed time. The complexity of the system, however, requires a dedicated dispensing device including a local programmable controller and a modem.